Raheem Brock not talking about arrest

It’s a common phenomenon whenever someone faces criminal charges. Since anything said by the defendant in any context can be used against him later, his lawyer typically advises him to say nothing.

Of course, that won’t stop us in the media from asking questions.

The day after he was booked on charges arising from allegedly walking out on a $27 check and resisting arrest, Seahawks defensive end Raheem Brock worked at a football camp in Philly, speaking with roughly 300 high school juniors and seniors at the Legends of the Pub football clinic. Per Phillip Lucas of the Philadelphia Daily News, organizers of the camp said that Brock wasn’t there to discuss his personal business.

The police were willing to talk about Brock’s personal business. Per Lucas, the trouble at the Copabanana on South Street began when Brock and the woman accompanying him were kicked out because the woman had brought in food from another restaurant. So Brock and the woman left without paying their bar tab.

“The manager and, I guess, the waitress, called police and told them where they were,” police spokeswoman Tanya Little said, according to Lucas.

Police found Brock and the woman at a place across the street.

“He wouldn’t come outside and wouldn’t comply with the officers,” Little said. “They tried to put the handcuffs on him and he resisted.”

The situation raises an interesting question regarding the duties of a consumer who is asked to leave a restaurant. Though most establishments reserve the right to refuse service, what happens when full service is refused after some service has been provided? Though Brock should have settled up, it’s hard to fault him for choosing to comply with an unreasonable directive to leave.

Really, how stupid was it for management of the Copabanana to kick the duo out after they’d already spent $27 on drinks, and when the fairly large man was apparently poised to buy the amount of food that a fairly large man eats?

Like so many other minor matters of this nature, Brock likely will work out some sort of a plea deal in which he pays the money and is placed on some sort of probation. Still, it seems like something that should have been completely avoided, either by the Copabanana, by Brock, or by both.

Mike, you might be right about kicking him out but for me it is one more example of people who are in major sports who think they are above the law.

dbellina says:Jun 18, 2011 12:38 PM

It’s not like he tried to run out on his tab. He was kicked out and went across the street. When the cops saw him, I’m sure they were a little nervous seeing how he was a large man. Why would they need to cuff someone over $27??

meatball13 says:Jun 18, 2011 12:43 PM

Common sense would have helped avoid this situation.
1-common sense should tell you not to try to bring another restaurants food into the dining establishment you are having drinks at…thats just ignorant!
2-When the police ask you to step outside,common sense tell you to do so!
3-Common sense also tell you not to resist arrest,it only makes matters worse!
I could go on ,but common sense tells me thats enough for now!!

Deb says:Jun 18, 2011 12:53 PM

Wait a minute … how stupid of management? Not many restaurants would let someone sit at their bar eating food from another establishment. It wasn’t stupid or unreasonable to ask them to leave. And he had a responsibility to pay his bar tab before going. Why would he think the drinks were free?

But I’m wondering why they call a football camp for high-schoolers “Legends of the Pub.”

“He wouldn’t come outside and wouldn’t comply with the officers,” Little said.
Nobody likes being asked to leave but don’t any of these knuckleheads think one step ahead.? I would bet the police gave him the chance to walk back across the street, pay and avoid all this too.

theblowtorchreview says:Jun 18, 2011 1:28 PM

Just another ho getting an innocent NFL player in trouble.

Let me guess, I bet her name is Tamika or Susanetta or Ladasha or something like that?

madpunter88 says:Jun 18, 2011 1:38 PM

Is bringing in food for another establishment really that much of an affront? I can think of plenty of reasons why two people might want to have a few drinks at a bar but would not want the same food. Presuming they intended to have a few drinks and one of the two people is buying food at that restaurant, is it really worth kicking a customer out of your restaurant? Is that a universal law that you can’t bring food from one restaurant into another?

Clearly something else happened or there is more to this story. But based on what is written here I can’t see how this is that big of a deal. He was angry at the way the restaurant treated him, he was kicked out before he finished his drink or his meal, and he didn’t think he owed them anything. I don’t think that is so outlandish.

Haha, I knew it. This story seemed so fishy when I first heard of it. Brock didn’t do anything wrong. He was kicked out of the restaurant, by the manager. Its not like he tried skipping on the bill. How can he pay the bill if he’s not allowed in? Idiots, that goes for the cops too. What exactly were you cuffing him for? Did they even ask him to just walk over and settle the bill? They just chickened out and arrested him for no reason.

CKL says:Jun 18, 2011 1:54 PM

I don’t get why “partial service” before he got asked to leave matters as to whether he has to pay or not. You consume, you pay. Period. Try claiming you don’t have to pay for your ordered drinks at a strip club if you violate their rules and get kicked out before you settle up the tab or while your latest drink is on its way to you.

MF I disagree with you. Bringing in outside food or beverage is seldom if ever going to be OK with a restaurant and if it is I am thinking you would have to ASK first (like bringing in a birthday cake or something). Heck, football stadia don’t even let you bring in water and if you won’t give up your outside food/beverage you aren’t allowed in.

“But I’m wondering why they call a football camp for high-schoolers “Legends of the Pub.””
————————————————–
Considering this comments thread has been stuck at four comments for like a half-hour, I’m sure this question has been answered 20 times already, but “Pub” is short for Public League. In Philly, there’s the Public League and the Catholic League for high-school sports.

And I agree with what everyone else is saying. How in the h-e-double-hockey sticks can you blame the management for Brock and his guest(s) being complete ignorant idiots? Who thinks it’s perfectly normal to bring food from one establishment into another place that, um, sells for?!

Its called legends of the pub referring to Philadelphia public school league. In Philly, the public league is referred to as “the pub.”

backindasaddle says:Jun 18, 2011 3:01 PM

Yes Mike, it is something that could have been completely avoided…. if Brock had simply paid his tab. There is no justification for not doing so. Also, resisting arrest is never a good idea. Combined, the two acts show he was acting foolishly and got exactly what he deserved.

wryly1 says:Jun 18, 2011 3:11 PM

Every week, local police blotters and community newspapers are replete with cases of people being arrested for walking out on small bar or restaurants tabs. They are not above the law, so why should a pro athlete be? As for bring your own food into a restaurant – well that’s just plain lowlife.

Its called legends of the pub referring to Philadelphia public school league. In Philly, the public league is referred to as “the pub.”
_____________________________________

The public school league is called the pub b/c all the Irish kids treat it as happy hour.

melonnhead says:Jun 18, 2011 3:24 PM

If the idiot had just come out and talked to police this entire mess probably could have been avoided but no, that’s too easy. Don’t you know who Raheem Brock is?

azbroncos says:Jun 18, 2011 3:25 PM

Wonder how this article would have sounded if an owner did this???

hawkfan50 says:Jun 18, 2011 3:36 PM

Wait a minute – two articles about a Seahawk player in one day ?!!

Things are pretty slow around PFT these days apparently …

Deb says:Jun 18, 2011 4:05 PM

@fatfreddystubbs & rzarecta777 …

Thanks for the info! Wasn’t expecting an interesting response (interesting because we didn’t have Public and Catholic leagues in the small-town South). fatfreddy, I remember sneaking out of a conference once to spend a fine summer day on South Street. Mm-mm cheese steak

vikesfansteve says:Jun 18, 2011 4:22 PM

If they were kicked out then it’s the bar that accepts responsibility for the tab. A good lawyer will get the charges dropped. He was told to leave & left. Why should he pay a tab he was never given before they kicked him out?

What the fk ever. I take food into other places all the time (usually my wife). If the management has a problem with it I leave. My friends and I never buy another bread stick from that place. Has anybody ever heard the customer is always right. I am still buying food (usually me and the rest of my family). Screw the copabanana. I don’t even like the seahawks either. This is ridiculous.

ICDogg says:Jun 18, 2011 5:17 PM

The whole thing sounds screwy but one thing I know from frequenting South Street … the Copabanana’s food is very subpar.

drbob117 says:Jun 18, 2011 6:04 PM

Mike, I got TRASHED for making the very same point on another website today. The Copa is in an area of South Philly where it can’t afford to lose goodwill, it’s inferior to almost all of the eateries in the area. A good lawyer should win him his case, and a jury isn’t going to buy the “resisting “thing without the underlying charge.

“The Copa is in an area of South Philly where it can’t afford to lose goodwill, it’s inferior to almost all of the eateries in the area.”
————————————————-

First off, are you from Bryn Mawr or somethin? Nobody actually from the city considers South Street “South Philly”.

Second, if it’s inferior, go to the other places.

Third, it’s rather ironic that, if i remember correctly (too lazy to google), Brock owns some fast-food franchises in North Philly, i think they’re some kind of wing places. So, I’m sure he’s fine with people stoppin at the McDonalds down the block, gettin it to go, and eatin it inside his place.

drbob117 says:Jun 18, 2011 7:31 PM

@fatfreddy;1) I’m from NE Philly, so I should know better fine, the S. Philly eastablishments are usually those south of Lombard or Pine, I suppose this is more of a CC thing. 2)many people DO go other places as a couple people before me have implied 3)I think he owns a ‘Wingstop’ franchise, but I’m sure if his staff throws them out for bringing something in, they get to keep the wings and soda they bought if they haven’t eaten already, Brock’s party didn’t get to do that at Copa; they were expected to leave without drinking their beer or eating their chicken AND pay.

billsfan1 says:Jun 18, 2011 9:18 PM

First off how many times was he asked to get rid of the food before he was tossed? Second off, he wasn’t arrested for not paying his bill. He was arrested for not cooperating with police….3rdly, if he brought food in what makes u think he would have ordered food there….why don’t u walk into a pizzeria, order food and leave with out paying….
Ur head is so far up the players asses that ur views are always jaded

rolandsloan says:Jun 19, 2011 12:42 AM

It’s not cool to go into a restaurant chewing on
food from another restaurant. It’s classless.

tombrookshire says:Jun 19, 2011 7:10 AM

When exactly was the question asked, “Do you know who I am?”

pftequalsgreatjournalism says:Jun 19, 2011 8:05 AM

For all you genii saying that it is ok to take food from one place into another restaurant, ask yourself if you would allow that if you owned the restaurant?

If you answer yes, now ask yourself if you allowed everyone to do it, how would you make money?

Sorry. I know the owner needs to make money, but I look at it from a different angle. If someone brings outside food in, that’s rude but you wouldn’t have sold them any food anyway. That money was never yours. It’s still rude and inconsiderate of them but if they’re buying drinks, no harm no foul. Kick them out and now you’re not selling those drinks either. You’re already not selling them food either way.

“The situation raises an interesting question regarding the duties of a consumer who is asked to leave a restaurant. Though most establishments reserve the right to refuse service, what happens when full service is refused after some service has been provided?”

If you kick someone out, you eat the cost unless you present them the bill in the process of kicking them out.

tangfish says:Jun 24, 2011 4:19 AM

And here I thought the cops in Philly had serious stuff to do. I guess not. The Cheesecake Caper™ will live on as a day in infamy!